It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pat Buchanan speaks the truth on Iran

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:27 AM
I have been an open admirer of Patrick Buchanan for years now. He was the main motivational force which drove me towards my anti-war, old right Conservative position. Pat has always been a source for complicated information to be translated into common sense articles which even the simplest FOX News watching, Bush loving flag waver can comprehend. This latest article of his is no different, yet another assertion of common sense application to foreign policy.

Why This Obsession With Iran?

Iran’s plants, at Natanz, where uranium is enriched to 5 percent, and at Fordow, where it is enriched to 20 percent — both below weapons grade — are under constant U.N. monitoring. Iran has offered to surrender its 20 percent uranium and cease enriching to that level, if the West will provide isotopes for its nuclear medicine and lift some of the more onerous sanctions.

No deal, says the United States. Iran must give up enrichment entirely and indefinitely.

This is the sticking point in the negotiations. Iran contends that as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, she has the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes. On this, the Iranian people stand behind their government.

Should this deadlock be a cause for war?


Comes the retort: President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a certifiable fanatic who has threatened to wipe Israel off the map. He cannot be allowed to get anywhere near a nuclear weapon.

Yet whatever Ahmadinejad said years ago, and that remains in dispute, he does not control the military, he does not decide on war, and he leaves the presidency next July and heads back to academia.

Is America afraid of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?


Otto von Bismarck said that preventive war was like committing suicide out of fear of death. Are we Americans headed for yet another unnecessary war?

In 1959, President Eisenhower invited Nikita Khrushchev, the Butcher of Budapest, to the United States for 10 days of touring and talks. In 1972, Richard Nixon traveled to Beijing to toast and talk with Chairman Mao, who was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of Chinese and tens of thousands of Americans in Korea. Ronald Reagan sought constantly for an opportunity to sit down across from the rulers of the “evil empire.”

Iran is not remotely in that league, either in crimes attributed to the regime or any actual or potential threat to the United States.

Have we no statesmen who can sit down, like Reagan at Reykjavik, and negotiate with Iran’s leaders for verifiable guarantees that she is not moving to nuclear weapons in return for something approaching normal relations?

If we could sit down with Stalin and Mao, why are the Ayatollah or Ahmadinejad so far beyond the pale? Can we just not handle that?

edit on 7/6/2012 by Misoir because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:48 AM
Iran may secretly be trying to achieve nuclear material but when the USA have nukes and of course other countries, I think it is a bit hypocritical to demand another country to end their nuclear program simply because you are scared they may build nuclear weapons somewhere down the track.

Does this deserve intervention? No. Should Iran stop their nuclear program? No. Iran is entitled to use nuclear energy and if the USA or any other country do not like it, then they should lead by example and stop all their nuclear activity as well. They may even have a legitimate case then.

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 03:51 AM
He and Bibi should put together an act and Pat can be the straight man.

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 05:53 AM
This whole nuclear issue with Iran sounds very much the WMD issue with Iraq, there are much more powerful reasons going on in the background, with how the banking and economic system is set up in Iran being one. If the nuclear issue was the only issue then I am sure it could be sorted out, but instead it does make great headlines to rally public support and acceptance for invasion as a new evil doer emerges in the media, despite what his true actions have shown.

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 10:54 AM
I endorse a nuclear Iran, maybe it would keep the local vermin in check.
I also believe the US should keep hands off of Iran.
What they do does not concern us at all.

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 11:34 AM
Without "bad guys", we'd have no reason for such a huge amount of expenditures towards Defense and propping up our allies militarily.

Just saying..

posted on Jul, 6 2012 @ 11:37 AM
My opinion from talking to my brother in-laws father, who is Bahá'í Iranian. Is somewhat shared with his after having a sit down and talk with him.

That is the west fears the shift in power the economic downfall has created, Iran being able to create cheap and sustainable nuclear energy, that they can in turn provide there people with. Affords them the ability to ween there country off using there own oil, thus making even more of there production available, to be sold on the open market.

By doing so there people would be more free with the resources due to the fact they now have lower grid costs thus stimulating there economy. The government would cement itself as a main money broker in the world, the oil riches alone would make them an even bigger player. To the point where the useless dollar becomes even more worthless when countries off the world start purchasing with a more crediable currency.

This shift would destroy western economies reliant on our control of the markets due to the dollar standard. From talking to him he say many of his people know this is not a war being fought over nuclear weapons this is a show of dominance, this is an attempt to keep the status quo, to not disrupt the way of life we are used too. This is a war fought to maintain, a grip on the world economy to futher fuel the banking cartels that already hold us down.

I hope we the people of the world speak up, and avert a great tragedy that would be WWW3. I hope the rhetoric spewed by our governments falls on deaf ears and the people who see through the BS make there voices heard. We have no right to dictate others freedom, economic sustainability, or push to become an economic superpower, we have no right to dictate another countries energy freedom, or how they share there resources.

We do have the right to protect ourselves, sad thing is our only enemy these days seems to be ourselves, not so much the people, but the government we put in place to lead us.


new topics

top topics


log in